19 years of US occupation of Afghanistan has built up some momentum behind the conflict, and despite how poorly the war has been going, there is still a sense among hawks that any deal that ends the war must be a bad one.
This has President Trump facing lobbying, some quiet and some not-so-quiet, from Republican hawks urging him to find a way to back out of the peace process and keep US troops on the ground.
That would surely be seen by most Taliban as a breach, and would restart the war. For the hawks, that’s likely not accidental, as many see eternal war in Afghanistan as a vital US interest.
President Trump is still answering questions with the catch-all “we’ll see what happens,” but has seen the pullout as politically important in the 2020 election. His commitment to peace clearly comes and goes, with previous abandonment of the Afghan peace a perfect example, but wanting troop cuts has been a persistent matter.
Who are these “Republican hawks?” Name them please, or don’t bring them up!
Evil War Criminal Blood Sucking Terrorists (Cowards Themselves) don’t send their own kids to fight but only Poor Americans are Sacrificed for THE BOSS; Zionist Terrorist Israel.
The three I’ve noticed being quoted in MSM are among the usual suspects — John Bolton, Lindsey Graham, and Liz Cheney.
The only with any clout is Graham.
Why do I have a feeling that these only public faces of the real interests behind war mongering? Neither strikes me as real power broker. They are always present with their opinions when war profiteers budget is threatened.
They just cannot see why change anything, for as long as money is there for the taking. No, I am afraid that unless we know whose interests these mouthpieces represent, we will be no wiser.
No conspiracy here, simple war lobbying
Did anyone mention “conspiracy”? Simple war lobbying is a corruption. And war lobbying corporate interests, as well as political lobbying that is a cover for various special interests — should be listed. So, they have money to get what they want. Do not we have the right to at least know who they are? Should not Congressmen and Senators be required to be transparent about interests they represent?
The answer is no, as there is NO organization in this country that is representing public interest. Yes, corporate and other special interests have just as much right to be heard as me. But their money buying representatives, political hacks such as Bolton or media hacks such as Chaney — should be a matter of high concern to voting taxpayer. My money as a taxpayer is clearly worthless as someone’s private money can buy influence, and essentially appropriate my money for their profit. Corruption is at the heart of all our problems.
I wrote “conspiracy” as you seem to not be aware of which companies invest in warmongering.
The corruption is deep…companies such as Raytheon recieve government contracts, then use some of the money to hire lobbyists to obtain more contracts. It is only “private money” in a very loose definition. It is taxpayer sourced.
And no, I don’t assign human freedom of speech rights to corporations. Until a corporation has a life expectancy, like a human, they don’t deserve human rights.
I am very much against commingling private and public funds. For as long as our money is treated not as a real capital — to be invested and to earn from investment — the gamesters in politics and their corporate buddies just treat it as theirs. Most of these warmongering corporations are really OUR companies, or state owned, if one prefers, Without OUR money, they will not survive on the market. And when they make profit selling whatever we paid to be produced, how cone this is not OUR profit? For a capitalist society we sure do not respect our money.
Yes, it is bizarre to think of a corporation as a person. But if it already so, why is not every working person a corporation? Corporations sure do not guarantee anything to an employee, so why are we even employees? Why would not each person be entitled to deduct all the expenses needed to maintain my viability as a corporate contractor? Everything from food and housing, transportation, education, etc. should be tax deductible.
Pretty clear “citizens united” was a misnomer…”money united” was more like it.
Petty sure, if we took profit out of warmongering, our wars would fizzle out.
Yes, better like Corporate Cartels United.
If we took profit on OUR investment in every corporate project that depends on taxpayer money — our treasury would not be empty. And projects will be managed to produce products, not look for time extensions and more money. And for every product produced with our money we will receive profits from sales in proportion to our investment. And it goes for all our assets not just money. Government paid staff and other assets — from experts, engineers to process related expenditures. All to be accounted for to the paperclip before profits are reaped.
And not only that we do not get any profit from products produced with our money, our President and various Embassy staffers serve as salesforce for the corporations when selling to other governments.
Nice. Wars are profitable on so many layers.
Stealing money from you and giving the money to someone else isn’t an “investment.” It’s just stealing from you and giving the money to someone else.
Taxes have existed in human history and better way has not yet been invented to collect funds and run a country.
These are taxes.
Now what does a government do with our taxes is another matter. Governments pay to purchase all sorts of things, and we can argue over the wisdom of spending OUR money.
But there is a particular form of spending that is a pure theft. When Government “buys” new technology, new military assets — from ships, carriers, planes, missiles, name it — it is not buying anything off the shelf. It is investing in a new technology not available on the market.
And since it is OUR money — I take objection to the way it is spent. This investment into a new technology should treat OUR capital in the same way any other private sector does — insure that a corporation selected for the project brings to the table THEIR share of investment. Their capital, their production facilities, their expertise.
Let us see what capital they bring to the table, not just sign a contract, snd WE pay for everything. The penalties are there just to make stupid taxpayer feel better, as in the end WE pay and pay.
Investment by both parties insure cost control and project management in this joint venture. Profit must be shared after expenses and in proportion to investment. Profit reduces cost of future purchase, and earnings from sales to third parties should go into treasury.
At present. our lords and ladies in Congress act as a sovereign monarch, and GIFTS money to their corporate aristocracy, for favors to the sovereign.
If we could just move up to capitalism I would not object.
Taxes, fees, monetary purchase, barter, are all forms of a social contract. I sympathize with Mr Knapps opinion on taxes as theft, only because our system in the present, is wholly corrupt, as Bianca illustrates.
If I sell a car in which I lie about its functionality, that does not make monetary purchase, in itself theft, it makes me corrupt. So too, the corruption of the use of taxes does not equate to “tax is theft”.
Example…say, a libertarian society…I go to a hospital with a broken arm, i expect to pay for treatment….yet, included in the payment is money to pave the parking lot, which the hospital managers have deemed necessary. I don’t have a car, and believe pavement to be a horrible thing. When I pay, have I been stolen from ? Libertarian philosophy is very confusing.
“If I sell a car in which I lie about its functionality, that does not make monetary purchase, in itself theft”
Yes, it does. Fraud is “theft by deception.”
“I go to a hospital with a broken arm, i expect to pay for treatment….yet, included in the payment is money to pave the parking lot, which the hospital managers have deemed necessary. I don’t have a car, and believe pavement to be a horrible thing. When I pay, have I been stolen from ?”
Did you agree to pay? Were you lied to in any way? What you seem to be implying is that if you have a job, and spend your salary on anything your boss hasn’t given you prior explicit permission to spend it on, there’s a problem.
“Libertarian philosophy is very confusing.”
No it isn’t. It can be summed up in a simple sentence — one of the most popular variants being “don’t hit people and don’t steal their stuff.”
Claiming it’s confusing is just saying “but I waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaant to hit people and take their stuff, and that gets in the way of me being able to pretend that doing so isn’t wrong.”
In the matter of the car sale, that particular sale was fraud, that doesn’t make all monetary purchases “fraud”.
In the same way, much taxation is fraudulent here, that doesn’t equate to all taxation as “theft”.
In the case of the hospital, no, I am not entering as an employee, but as a consumer of health services. Entering with a broken limb, i may, or may not be aware that part of my payment is for the parking lot. If I am not aware, then I will pay for something (parking lot) that normally I would choose not to pay for.
Oh, “confused” may mean all that stuff to you, but not to me. Don’t hit people and steal stuff covers alot of differing political philosophies, doesn’t really clarify anything.
The three I’ve noticed being quoted in MSM are among the usual suspects — John Bolton, Lindsey Graham, and Liz Cheney.
The agreement already seems weak enough and slow enough that if even this is stopped, there is no hope. How can anyone, even hawks, think that keeping this “war” going which had no justification even in October 2001 (pretending it was linked to “9∕11” when it was obviously already planned) will help the USA in any way?
It only helps who ever is benefitting from the $trillion dollar heroin trade that was almost eradicated by the Taliban but now is being guarded by GIs.
Those Rhodesian interest that want too continue the anglo saxon empire couldn’t care less if it benefits the nation, nor the Zionist that want nothing more than to keep America engaged in the middle east to keep strong states from forming and 💩 ing on their dreams of a Greater Israel. If this breaks the US, well it’s not as if allowing a pullback doesn’t already equal failure for them, so nothing too loose by continuing.
Doesn’t look like the war pushers will have much more screeching to do. US just conducted airstrikes against the Taliban. Doubt this so called “peace process” included enough control of resources to make The Empire happy. They want it all and they want it for free and that’s that.
In an election year, good luck, not gonna happen.
“His commitment to peace clearly comes and goes, with previous abandonment of the Afghan peace a perfect example, but wanting troop cuts has been a persistent matter.”
For Ron Paul, wanting troop reduction has been a persistent matter. For Donald Trump it’s been something interspersed with deploying more troops(Saudi Arabia,Syria,Afghanistan), piling on sanctions, assassinating generals and threatening countries with obliteration. You can’t be part time peace.
“Republican hawks”…..is there another kind ?
Obama never got them out at all – should have refused that Peace Prize.
Again, Ballzless Trump will do nothing, troops should have been removed 3 years ago!
Yes, Trump should have removed them 3 years ago but they should NEVER have been sent in.